Support

Debate Map: Disputes in the South and East China Seas

Last Updated: 23 March 2017

Created by Alexander Wentker, Brasenose College, University of Oxford, and John Louth, Editor-in-Chief for Academic Law at Oxford University Press

The following index maps scholarly commentary on the international law aspects of the conflicts in and around the South China and East China Seas, including maritime boundary disputes, the question of sovereignty over the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands, China's recent announcement of an Air Defence Identification Zone, and the Philippines/China UNCLOS arbitration. It brings together primary documents with discussions in English-language legal blogs and a selection of journal articles.

Use this map to review scholarly arguments and to keep track of which issues have been covered and who has said what. For a broad range of online OUP materials on these issues please see the guide on our Home Page.

The use of 'South China Sea' and 'East China Sea' throughout this map does not imply any position as to the relevant countries' maritime claims.

(vi) 20 October 2016, Xinhua and the New York Times report on an agreement between the Chinese President Xi Jinping and the Philippines’ President Rodrigo Duterte to reopen the negotiations over the South China Sea disputes

(vi) 27 June 2012, Benjamin Wittes at Lawfare (linking to Chinese slides from a MILOPS conference, illustrating its claims to sovereignty over the South China Sea islands), see also this follow-up post, on a sharp exchange between China and the Philippines at the 2013 conference.

(ix) 1 December 2013, Diane Desierto at EJIL Talk! (On ICJ Judge Xue's comments at the 2013 AsianSIL conference on China's position on settling the maritime disputes in the South China Sea and on the ADIZ, highlighting that it contradicts the ASEAN Declaration of Conduct)

(iii) 4 June 2013, Julian Ku at Opinio Juris (arguing that China needs to clarify what it bases its nine-dash line on and that it undermines more plausible sovereignty claims over particular South China Sea islands)

(v) 22 March 2015, Michael C. Davis at SSRN (focusing on disputes over the Dokdo and the Diaoyu Islands and comparing these disputes in the East China Sea to other sets of disputes in the area, especially, the South China Sea)

(vi) 8 December 2013, Julian Ku at Opinio Juris (discussing the US response to China's ADIZ and arguing that it is hamstrung by its decision not to take a position on the question of who has sovereignty over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands)

(ii) 22 January 2013, Julian Ku at Opinio Juris (also commenting on the initiation of arbitration proceedings, arguing that this may make sense from a political perspective but that the UNCLOS panel is likely to deny jurisdiction – see also an earlier post here

(iii) 19 February 2013, Julian Ku at Opinio Juris (also discussing China's decision not to participate in the UNCLOS arbitration and what this means for UNCLOS' dispute settlement system – see also Ku's post here, disagreeing that the walk-out has made the arbitration 'bizarre' and 'futile' and arguing that enforcement of any eventual decision would have been unlikely either way)

(v) 20 May 2013, Stefan Talmon in the Global Times (arguing that the arbitral tribunal should refuse jurisdiction, as The Philippines' claims either don't raise a dispute or relate to questions of sovereignty that are excluded from the UNCLOS dispute settlement process - see also Julian Ku at Opinio Juris, disagreeing with Talmon on the arbitration's jurisdictional obstacles and criticising China for boycotting the tribunal)

(iii) 28 April 2016, Diane Desierto on EJIL:Talk! (reflecting on the ‘internationalisation’ of maritime disputes in the South China Sea, arguing that such an internationalisation may be inferred from massive threats to the global maritime environment in the context of this case, which would regard the international community as a whole and would go beyond a bilateral level)

(vi) 13 July 2016, Julian Ku at Lawfare (on the implications of the Award for the US’ policy of freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea; see also his 19 July post on the prospects of using the Award to ‘shame’ China through diplomacy)

(xix) 5 December 2016, Ilias Plakokefalos at SSRN (analysing main environmental law aspects of the Merits Award and placing them in the wider context of both international environmental law and the environmental issues in the South China Sea)

Makane Moïse Mbengue (focusing on aspects of international environmental law in the Merits Award, in particular its approach towards environmental due diligence requirements and reliance on scientific experts);

Lori Fisler Damrosch (analysing the Merits Award’s interpretation and application of the military activities exception contained in Art. 298(1)(b) UNCLOS and assessing implications of the Tribunal’s findings in this respect for the prospect of a potential U.S. ratification of UNCLOS)

(ii) 21 September 2012, Julian Ku at Opinio Juris (arguing that, under the US-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security, the US could be obliged to defend Japan against Chinese military operations in the context of the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands – see also the comments)

Disclaimer: Please note that inclusion in or exclusion from this index does not indicate approval or disapproval of views or reflect a judgement on the quality of argument.

Any comments on the content or organization of this map and suggestions for inclusion are welcome. Either send an email to merel.alstein@oup.com or use the Contact Us service at the top of the screen.